Governance (91)

The media advisors of the prime minister must be credited, at least for this one.

They have been more or less successful till date in Teflon-coating the image of prime minister from the endless allegations of corruption that seems to rock his government.

Most critics, commentators or TV anchors virtually begin his or her criticism of the government by first conceding that the prime minister is 'personally' an honest person. This repeated assertion by the vast sections of the media seems to have its desired effect even on the political adversaries of the prime minister, both within the Congress party and outside.

Invariably, in all debates, they readily concede that the prime minister is an honest man, while simultaneously attacking his Cabinet colleagues for their acts of omissions and commissions.

For some, their expansive vocabulary has failed them. Some have called it a resounding slap in the face of the government. Some have simply smiled at the discomfiture of the government.

Some constitutional experts, while welcoming the decision, have in private conversations termed this as a blatant overreach of the judiciary.

Surely, the interim order of the Bench of Justice B Sudershan Reddy and Justice S S Nijjar, on appointing a Special Investigation Team to monitor the black money issue, has set the Yamuna on fire.

Perhaps never in the history of independent India has one pillar of the Constitution implicitly castigated another pillar -- the executive, in this case -- as heavily as the Supreme Court has done this time.

And this order of the Supreme Court will surely have serious repercussions not only on the functioning of this government, but also on succeeding ones.

She purchased a house in Chennai for Rs 57,000 in 1969. She sold the said property to her watchman for Rs 60,000 a year later in 1970. The Registrar, however, claimed that he was a witness to only Rs 15,000 exchanging hands.

The same day she entered into a lease agreement for renting the said property with the watchman for a monthly rent of Rs 100.

A couple of years later, the watchman sold the house to her mother for Rs 45,000 -- i.e. at a loss of Rs 15,000. Subsequently, the mother willed the said house back to her in 1973.

Who is she? She is Rajathi Ammal, wife of former chief minister of Tamil Nadu M Karunanidhi and mother of jailed Rajya Sabha MP Kanimozhi. Bewildered by the turn of events, the Sarkaria Commission -- that went into allegations of corruption against DMK chief M Karunanidhi and the then chief minister of Tamil Nadu in the mid-70s -- termed this (and several such instances) as 'scientific corruption'.

If corruption involved merely thousands of rupees in the mid-seventies, it involves several thousand millions of rupees now. One can blame that on inflation in the country. But let us not forget that the science of corruption too has developed in India since the 70s, more particularly when it involved a southern political party, to alarming proportions.

The net result: corruption has become bigger, better, and more brazen. The operating word here is brazen.